Admin: I must have hit some "hot" key that posted this thread I was trying to start while I was typing in the title. I should would like to know what that key is, so it doesn't happen again.
Anyway, here are two arguments and God must choose the best of the two.
1. I have looked at all the evidence I can find, and cannot find any evidence that proves or disproves the existence of God. Therefore, I choose not to believe in a God, but will keep my mind open for more evidence. I will be good to other people because I think it is the right thing to do. I expect nothing in return for that.
2. I have looked at a 2,500 year old book which says it speaks for God and believe it against all contrary evidence, which I refuse to consider. Therefore, I believe in the God of that book which says God is genocidal maniac, with an uncontrollable temper, is petty, admits to being very jealous, who gives mankind tests impossible to pass and then blames them when they don't, and who will brutally murder all humans who don't play by the rules in that book and by the rules of my leaders who say they personally speak for God. I do not need to have any sort of open mind. I know I am right. I will be good to people because God told me to be good to people. I expect to be eternally rewarded for that.
One person believes in God. The other doesn't. They've both stated their arguments. Let's assume they are both wrong about what God is really like. That being the case, which one would a God worth being called a God favor?
Farkel
...OUTLAW